• Khursheed N Jeejeebhoy.
• Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Division of Gastroenterology, St. Michael's Hospital, Ontario, Canada. khushjeejeebhoy@compuserve.com
• Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2002 Nov 1;5(6):695-8.

AbstractIn this review, topics with scientific strength, topical interest, and controversy were selected. Over the past 50 years, malnutrition has become increasingly recognized as a cause of increased morbidity and mortality in hospital patients. From 1970 to 1980, parenteral nutrition was advocated as the most appropriate form of nutritional therapy for hospital patients. Since then, parenteral nutrition has been replaced by enteral nutrition as the best way of delivering nutrients to hospital patients. The timing of enteral nutrition has been debated. Should it be instituted early, within the first 24 hours? In addition, enteral nutrition containing immune-enhancing nutrients such as arginine, omega-3 fatty acids, glutamine, and nucleotides has been advocated for critically ill patients. The relative merits of enteral versus total parenteral nutrition continue to be debated. Questions about possible complications related to enteral nutrition have been raised. Patients are at risk of nosocomial pneumonia from aspiration and at risk of bowel ischemia because enteral nutrition increases intestinal oxygen consumption. Steroids are often used to treat Crohn disease, but because of undesirable side effects, various techniques have been used to reduce steroid dependency. Enteral nutrition has been advocated as a way of reducing steroid dependency. Finally, enteral nutrition is routinely used to feed demented patients and those in a vegetative state. It is not clear whether this practice alters outcome or quality of life.

21 keywords...

hide…